Galactic Civilization

Create account
Login
Downloads
NewsGroup
Community
Purchase
Galactic Forum
Strategies
Mods
Empires
Do you still think GalCiv 1 is fun even with GalCiv II out?
758 votes
1- Yes
2- No


re poll: Would you pre-order on-line a Master of Magic 2?
  Search:   
Go to Bottom         Go to Bottom
#25  by Citizen Coplann - 6/23/2004 1:58:50 AM

yeah Atari screwed up MoO3 (what probably helped GalCivs success in the end ).

Atari also published NWN Hordes of the Underdark in Europe. Localization was fine, but we had to wait like half a year for it.

nevertheless, I would pre order MoM2.

          
#26  by Veteran Solo4114 - 6/23/2004 7:12:22 AM

Whoa, wait a second -- you guys are in licensing talks with Atari?? GET THEM TO LICENSE THE STAR CONTROL STUFF. And THEN go get Fred and Paul to write the story. Do that, and you'll get my pre-order. If it's the OFFICIAL sequel to Star Control 2, as written and approved by the original creators, I'll preorder no questions asked. MoM2, though, I can't say, since I never played the original.

      
#27  by Citizen Aww_Nuts - 6/23/2004 7:16:11 AM

I played MoM alot. I still go back and play it, now and then. I would purchase, the new version, online via download or in a store or whatever.

One bug that needed fixing is the one on cities that produced more than 255 gold per turn would wrap the counter back around to zero. Some cities, rarely, could be tricked out to produce more than 255 gold and then you would have to back them down a bit or else lose their 255 gold/turn.

                      
#28  by Avatar Frogboy - 6/23/2004 11:05:38 AM

Don't blame Atari for MOO3. 

But the reason the risk ON US would be high for doing a MOM2 would be precisely because Stardock would have full control over the game.

That's the trade off. Stardock would self-fund the project (i.e. 7 digit budget). The reason Galactic Civilizations was done in the way it was was because we self-funded that.  That gives us a lot of flexibility. But that flexibility comes with a price.

5k pre-orders at $45 apiece would be less than a quarter of the game's budget. But at least it would give us a good inkling that there was a demand for this game still. After all, some might argue that Age of Wonders and HOMM and other games have filled this niche (I don't personally agree with that).



                      
#29  by Citizen Gunner - 6/23/2004 11:31:40 AM

Alright, I have a two questions.

First, when would MOM2 come out?
Secondly, when is Galciv 2 coming out?


                    
#30  by Veteran Terl - 6/23/2004 12:10:27 PM

5k pre-orders at $45 apiece would be less than a quarter of the game's budget. But at least it would give us a good inkling that there was a demand for this game still. After all, some might argue that Age of Wonders and HOMM and other games have filled this niche (I don't personally agree with that).


Have you asked anywhere other than here, i.e Apoloyton or some of the Civilization sites? I think there may be quite a bit of interest in MoM. Even checking with some of the roguelike gaming communities you would find more interested.



                    
#31  by Citizen Genghis Hank - 6/23/2004 1:08:29 PM

My daughter would not forgive me if MoM2 came out and I didn't get it. I might even have to get it on two computers if I wanted any time on it myself. My vote was "maybe" because I would hope to get it in the drengin.net subscription.

                          
#32  by Citizen Moser_Alchemist - 6/23/2004 3:23:55 PM

...because Stardock would have full control over the game


Now THAT is great news! Sign me up!

                            
#33  by Veteran Captain Jack Sparrow - 6/23/2004 4:37:43 PM

I see no problwm whatsoever with getting 5k worth of preorders on that title if you get the word out on all the usual gaming sites as to what you're doing. You'll have it quickly when you go beta if you include access to the beta in your preorder price.

                          
#34  by Veteran Captain Jack Sparrow - 6/23/2004 4:38:50 PM

I'm also sure those of us that would like to see that title preserved would help get the word out too.

                          
#35  by Citizen Brackard - 6/24/2004 9:23:38 AM

If you build it, they will come.

                    
#36  by Citizen LDiCesare - 6/25/2004 3:08:49 AM

MoM is a game that is dearly loved by many, and I know many people on Apolyton for instance talk about it fondly. That means there is a market, but whether people know or trust Stardock enough to buy it is another matter.

                      
#37  by Citizen Kristian Aspinall - 6/25/2004 9:35:06 AM

Please, for the love of all that is holy, produce this game.

None of the "replacement" games, HOMM, Age of Wonders etc. have ever come close to the originals brilliance.

After playing Gal Civ, I'm sure stardock are the team out there who can...

      
#38  by Citizen Zerg_Food - 6/25/2004 11:52:44 AM

Instead of looking for sequels to titles we all loved, which leads to horrors such as MoO 3 and SC 3, we should instead look for game designers we trust to make good games and provide good customer service.

Stephen Barcia made some great games, including Master of Magic and what I still think is the greatest 4X space game of all time, Master of Orion I. I don't think he's in the business anymore, though.

So MoM 2 is just a name attached to whomever is going to design it. That's the name to watch out for.

"Atari" (formerly Infogrames) has a lousy reputation, but StarDock has a good one. The success or failure of a MoM sequel, absent Stephen Barcia, would seem tied to which of the two ultimately has creative control of the project.

            
#39  by Citizen PherdnutChiken - 6/25/2004 12:42:17 PM

Good point iCapn but as somebody who wishes he could still play MoM if it worked on a modern computer, I'd very much like to see the graphics update with a few obvious tweaks like making the gnolls useful happen.

#40  by Veteran Solo4114 - 6/25/2004 2:37:22 PM

Re: old titles on new computers, try using DOS emulators. DOSBox is one I've heard of, but haven't tried. Alternatively, make a DOS startup disk and use that.

Re: iCapn's point, I agree that StarDock has a good reputation. I'd trust them to make a game with fun mechanics and overal gameplay design. As for making sequels, I think it really depends on the nature of the original games. SC3 sucked because...well, for too many reasons to get into here. But one of the primary reasons was because SC2 was heavily based on story and dialogue, and SC3 basically butchered that story a la Highlander 2: the Crappening.

If a game is primarily based on mechanics, like most 4X games are (I mean, let's be honest here. Does it matter if the other races are "Lizard People" or some other type of race?), then as long as a company has a proven record with developing games with good mechanics, I'd trust 'em. If I knew about the original MoM, I might trust StarDock to make a sequel, since it'd probably be MOSTLY based on mechanics.

As far as, for example, a Star Control sequel, I'd trust StarDock to do a good job on their own, especially with mechanics, but would rather hear the original creators' visions as far as story goes. IE: You can like both Tom Clancy and John Grisham as writers, but you wouldn't want John Grisham writing a story about Tom Clancy characters, would you?

That's the only reason I wouldn't pre-order a Star Control sequel -- well, that and because of the somewhat up-in-the-air status of the property itself, legally speaking, which could result in sequels moving further away from the original material that made me like the franchise in the first place. That's the primary reason why I'd want the Toys for Bob guys to at least write the story and dialogue for the sequel to Star Control.

Anyway, as far as MoM goes, i may have to check it out now, if I can get a decent DOS emulator going on my rig.

      
#41  by Citizen Zerg_Food - 6/25/2004 5:14:06 PM

SC 3's plodding boredom was mostly due to stuff the player had to micro which could've been either managed by the AI or abstracted out altogether.

I would never have to allocate workers to mines if the AI just assumed that the mining output should always be whatever is needed and did it for me.

Meanwhile the refinery should've had a set level of "reserve" RU's as its only control, and the computer would again automatically set the fiddly bits to make it happen. If you wanted a "burst of production" you could either lower the RU reserve or transfer RU's to the base.

The factory is an easy one: it only runs when something needs building, but when it does it runs full blast and eats the RU reserve. If the player doesn't want the factory to run, there is -- ready for this? -- an "Off" switch. Simple.

Having the factory eat the reserve allows the player to set a default at the start of the game and never touch it again, instead of microing small reserves for new worlds and big reserves for old ones. New worlds plain and simple wouldn't keep reserves until their base construction finally slowed down.

Research works the same way: deposit an artifact, the lab runs full blast. Don't want it to? Keep the artifact onboard ship.

Colony Pods are cheap, so setting a reserve works here, too. "Maintain a stock of 4 pods." Simple. If you want ships or fuel instead, set this to "0". This one you'd start lowering over time as you built more colonies, but if you don't they're cheap, so if you build a few too many, no big deal.

That leaves ships and fuel. One slider would work here: move toward "Ships" you get ships, move toward "Fuel" you get fuel. Ships and fuel are the only things you never want to stop building, so all of a base's production not temporarily tied up elsewhere goes here. This is a "set it and forget it" control because of the nature of SC3 ships: they're either good and you want them or they suck and you don't. That doesn't really change over time ... is there such a thing as too many Dreadnaughts?

The automation couldn't really manage very well on planets with resources < 10,000 so guess what? Disallow colony building on planets w/ resources < 10k. Problem solved. Production is lousy under 15k anyway.

So we go from 7 ratio sliders the user has to pointlessly micro just to get the colony working to a set of 4 simple controls focusing on whether the main export is to be fuel or ships.

Playtesting would've revealed this rather simple and obvious solution, but I'm guessing they were more into writing a really bad storyline than worrying about whether the game was actually playable.

As for myself, I was so appalled at the horrible design I couldn't help but think about how it should've been done better. It doesn't deserve thinking about, but like gawking at a 12-car pileup it was impossible not to.

            
#42  by Citizen Jackey Jackey - 6/25/2004 6:38:01 PM

I have MOM on my computer and have run it using a DOS emulator. It definitely needs an upgrade in graphics.

The emulator works too slowly for the game to be very playable. The turns take longer than Galciv.

                        
#43  by Citizen Coplann - 6/26/2004 11:57:22 AM

After all, some might argue that Age of Wonders and HOMM and other games have filled this niche (I don't personally agree with that).


I dont agree there either. Age of Wonders and HOMM are good games, but nothing was as complex or fun as MoM.

AoW and HOMM are just that. fantasy turn based games with only a few concepts taken from MoM.

MoM is just a classic just like Civilization. Nothing comes close to it.



          
#44  by Citizen Aww_Nuts - 6/26/2004 12:07:53 PM

I still run MoM and keep an old computer around to run it and other older titles (MoO, Civ, Empire etc.). If you can get your hands on an older computer the original games work fine. Yes, it is an adjustment back to cheesy graphics et al.

                      
#45  by Veteran Solo4114 - 6/26/2004 6:25:44 PM

When I play retro games, I don't find it to be an adjustment at all. I accept them as products of their time. Now, if I played a game TODAY that had such graphics...that might be a different story. But honestly, I think too much is made of cool graphics and sounds at the expense of good GAMEPLAY. Not that you have to sacrifice one for the other, but companies often seem to do just this.

      
#46  by Citizen Zerg_Food - 6/26/2004 11:02:39 PM

I can run MoM in a DOS prompt under Windows 98. Even the sound & music work!

However, it took EMM386 in config.sys to do it and I barely got enough stuff loaded into upper memory for the game to run. If you cut it too close you get the intro screen but it crashes when you try to actually play the game. Get another 8-12k freed in lower memory and you've got it.

            
#47  by Citizen Nomorebeef - 6/26/2004 11:51:31 PM

Holy Crap!!!!!!! I would pre-purchase 10 of these if that meant you it would be done. MOM is one of the best strategy games ever. I play it more than CIV or MOO!! I don't have any sound, but who cares! Just re-do the graphics and sound, add multiplayer, and allow more than 4 opponents during the play and you're golden. People who love these games dont care about graphics a whole lot. I bought MOO III when it came out and was appalled. You dont have to change very much at all about the game and all will be well. I would be as excited when I find out about MOM II as when I found out about Sid re-doing Pirates! I can't wait.

      
#48  by Citizen Nomorebeef - 6/27/2004 12:00:26 AM

By the way, if you want MOM to run on a current computer, install it like regular. When you get the setup page at the end of the install, select no sound. Then you find the program file in the Master of Magic folder and right-click on it. Click on 'properties' and then on the 'program' tab. Then you click on the 'advanced' button at the bottom of that window. There are 3 buttons at the top of the 'advanced' window. Check the one labeled "prevent MS-DOS programs from detecting windows" and the game will run fine. I have an Athlon XP 2200 and use windows 98 and can play. The battles run fast, and theres no sound, but thats ok. Hope this works for others as this game rocks.

      
#49  by Veteran Gerakken - 6/27/2004 4:05:51 PM

Do people trust Stardock enough to turn out a good game enough to pre-order?


This man's answer is heck yes!

If this project is a go, the hardest part for us will be the wait. It should all be fine if Atari sits back, takes their cut, and not meddle in things. Stardock I trust, Atari I do not.

So take your time, do it right, and if the after release support is as good as we are used to, then it should all be good. Build this, I agree, and they will come.

                      
<<   <-   1 (2) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   ->   >> 
   Page 2 of 16   

Go to Top    Go Back to Message Board    Go to Top
To be able to post something you have to become a member
Click here!



Copyright 1995-2021 Stardock Corporation. All rights reservered.
Site created by Pixtudio and Stardock, designed by Pixtudio.